STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN EQUITY
NOTE 6 FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENT
6. CONTROL ENVIRONMENT
The control environment for fair value measure-ment in Norges Bank Investmeasure-ment Managemeasure-ment
and Central Banking Operations is organised around a formalised and documented accounting and valuation policy and guidelines which are sup-ported by work and control procedures. The Norges Bank Investment Management policy doc-ument lays down valuation policies and outlines procedures for Norges Bank Investment Manage-ment’s valuation committee. The portfolios managed by Central Banking Operations contain only short-dated financial instruments, where val-uation risk is very low. Therefore, Central Banking Operations does not have its own valuation com-mittee, but any questions are discussed by a sep-arate management committee.
The valuation environment has been adapted in accordance with market standards and estab-lished practices for valuation. This is implemented in practice through daily valuation of all holdings.
These processes are scalable with regard to market changes and are based on internal and external data solutions.
All holdings and investments are generally valued by external, independent valuation provid-ers. They have been chosen on the basis of analy-ses performed by the Norges Bank units responsi-ble for valuation.
Prices for financial instruments from independ-ent valuation providers are based on observable prices. On a daily basis, the valuation process is subject to numerous controls, focusing on defined thresholds and sensitivities. The levels of these thresholds and sensitivities are monitored and adjusted in accordance with prevailing market conditions. At each month-end, additional exten-sive controls are performed to ensure compliance with established valuation procedures and the val-uation policy’s fair value measurement principles.
This includes verifying that external prices are used as required by the fair value hierarchy appli-cable at the time in question and verifying that the resulting prices reflect fair value as at the date concerned, i.e. the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. As part of this review, particular attention is paid to illiquid financial instruments and real estate investments, i.e.
investments deemed to pose valuation
chal-lenges. Illiquid instruments are identified using sector and currency classifications, price differ-ences between different external valuation pro-viders, degree of coverage of the instrument by external price vendors, credit rating indicators, bid/ask spreads, and activity in the market.
In Norges Bank Investment Management, a val-uation memo and report are prepared at each quarter-end documenting the results of the con-trols performed and the most important sources of uncertainties in the valuations.
The valuation committee, which comprises Norges Bank Investment Management’s leader group, meets every quarter prior to the publica-tion of the financial reporting. The committee reviews the documentation, discusses major pricing issues and approves the valuation.
NOTE 7 RISK
FRAMEWORK FOR INVESTMENT RISK
The Executive Board has established principles for risk management. These are detailed further through policies and guidelines. The composition of the foreign exchange reserves’ portfolios and the associated risk are determined primarily by the benchmark index defined by the governor. In the investment mandate for the portfolios, there are a number of limits and restrictions within the combined equity and bond asset class, and within each asset class. The restrictions regulate the degree of active management, in addition to the rule-based capital allocation. The portfolios pri-marily contain equities, government bonds and Treasury bills, but may also contain forward exchange contracts, futures contracts, interest rate swaps and repurchase/reverse repurchase agreements.
Through management of the foreign exchange reserves, Norges Bank is exposed to various types of financial risk, including market risk, credit risk and counterparty risk. The Bank is also exposed to credit risk associated with lending to banks.
ity for managing the portfolio and individual mandate risk, while the risk management area independently measures, manages and reports investment risk across portfolios, asset classes and other levels within the portfolios that reflect the investment process.
Norges Bank uses the following definitions of the various forms of investment risk:
• Market risk is the risk of a loss or a change in market value as a result of changes in financial market variables. Market risk for the portfolios in the foreign exchange reserves is measured along the following dimensions: absolute and relative exposure as compared to the bench-mark, volatility and correlation risk. Market risk is actively taken to generate investment returns in line with the objectives of the investment mandates.
• Credit risk is the risk of loss due to an issuer being unable to meet its payment obligations.
• Counterparty risk is the risk of loss related to the possible bankruptcy of a counterparty or other similar event leading to counterparties defaulting. Counterparty risk can be classified into credit risk associated with the bankruptcy of a counterparty, settlement risk and custo-dian risk. Counterparty risk is controlled and mitigated to the greatest extent possible, given the investment strategy.
RISK MANAGEMENT PROCESS
Norges Bank employs several measurement methodologies, processes and systems to control financial risk. Robust and widely accepted risk management systems and processes are comple-mented by internally developed measurement methods and processes.
MARKET RISK
Norges Bank measures risk in both absolute terms for the actual portfolio, and the relative market risk for investments in the portfolio.
Continuous monitoring, measurement and
Asset class by region
The foreign exchange reserves are invested across several asset classes and regions, as shown in Table 7.1 below.
Table 7.1 Allocation by asset class and region
Amounts in NOK millions 31 Dec. 2014 Market value
in percentage by region
Market value in percentage by asset
class Assets minus liabilities LONG-TERM PORTFOLIO
Equities Americas 61.7
Europe 23.4
Asia and Oceania 14.9
Total equities 40.3 139 984
Bonds Americas 45.9
Europe 44.7
Asia and Oceania 9.4
Total bonds 59.7 207 326
MONEY MARKET PORTFOLIO
Securities Americas 68.0
Europe 32.0
Total securities 64.7 32 271
Deposits Americas 88.6
Europe 11.4
Total deposits 35.3 17 626
PETROLEUM BUFFER PORTFOLIO
Deposits Americas 49.8
Europe 50.2
Total deposits 100.0 51 419
Amounts in NOK millions 31 Dec. 2013 Market value
in percentage by region
Market value in percentage by asset
class Assets minus liabilities LONG-TERM PORTFOLIO
Equities Americas 57.9
Europe 26.2
Asia and Oceania 15.9
Total equities 43.4 118 532
Bonds Americas 43.0
Europe 46.9
Asia and Oceania 10.1
Total bonds 56.6 154 777
MONEY MARKET PORTFOLIO
Securities Americas 77.4
Europe 22.6
Total securities 80.9 30 953
Deposits Americas 64.4
Europe 35.6
Total deposits 19.1 7 308
PETROLEUM BUFFER PORTFOLIO
Deposits Americas 56.2
Europe 43.8
Total deposits 100.0 16 862
Concentration risk
The foreign exchange reserves contain substantial investments in fixed income instruments issued by sovereigns. The reserves are also invested private companies that issue equities.
Table 7.2 shows exposures to fixed income securities issued by sovereigns, which include nominal government bonds and Treasury bills issued in local currency or in foreign currency, and inflation-linked bonds in local currency.
Table 7.2 Holdings within the segment government bonds
Amounts in NOK millions Market value
31 Dec. 2014 31 Dec. 2013
US 116 721 90 334
France 39 749 29 377
Table 7.3 shows the foreign exchange reserves’
largest holdings of non-government bond and equity holdings by issuer. Covered bonds issued
by financial institutions are included in the bonds column.
Table 7.3 Largest holdings excluding sovereigns
Amounts in NOK millions 31 Dec. 2014
Sector Bonds Equities Total market value
Apple Inc Technology - 2 440 2 440
Exxon Mobil Corp Oil & Gas - 1 478 1 478
Microsoft Corp Technology - 1 294 1 294
Google Inc Technology - 1 112 1 112
Johnson & Johnson Healthcare - 1 082 1 082
Wells Fargo & Co Financials - 1 069 1 069
Berkshire Hathaway Inc Financials - 1 041 1 041
General Electric Co Manufacturing - 953 953
Procter & Gamble Co/The Consumer goods - 923 923
Nestlé SA Consumer goods - 909 909
Amounts in NOK millions 31 Dec. 2013
Sector Bonds Equities Total market value
Apple Inc Technology - 1 708 1 708
Exxon Mobil Corp Oil & Gas - 1 492 1 492
Google Inc Technology - 997 997
General Electric Co Manufacturing - 934 934
Microsoft Corp Technology - 925 925
Chevron Corp Oil & Gas - 818 818
Johnson & Johnson Healthcare - 817 817
Royal Dutch Shell PLC Oil & Gas - 803 803
Wells Fargo & Co Financials - 786 786
Nestlé SA Consumer goods - 775 775
Volatility and correlation risk
Norges Bank uses models to quantify the risk of value changes associated with all or parts of the foreign exchange reserves. Volatility is a standard risk measurement technique based on the statis-tical concept of standard deviation, which takes into account correlations between different instruments in the portfolio. This risk measure provides an estimate of how much one can expect the portfolio value to change or fluctuate, based on market conditions over the past three
years. Expected volatility can be expressed in terms of the portfolio’s absolute risk or relative risk. The model uses equally weighted weekly return data from the past three years and a para-metric calculation methodology. The model is tai-lored to the investment horizon for the foreign exchange reserves, which is shorter than for the GPFG. The same model is used for both portfolio risk and relative volatility.
Table 7.4 presents risk both in terms of the portfolio’s absolute risk and the relative risk.
Table 7.4 Expected volatility, in percent
Expected volatility, in percent
31 Dec. 14 Min 2014 Max 2014 Avg. 2014 31 Dec. 13 Min 2013 Max 2013 Avg. 2013
Long-term portfolio 7.7 7.2 8.1 7.7 8.0 7.1 8.2 7.6
Equities 11.4 11.2 14.0 12.7 13.9 12.9 14.1 13.6
Bonds 8.9 8.5 10.0 9.4 9.8 9.8 10.4 10.1
Money market portfolio 0.03 0.03 0.09 0.06 0.07 0.09 0.10 0.10
Expected relative volatility, basispoints
31 Dec. 14 Min 2014 Max 2014 Avg. 2014 31 Dec. 13 Min 2013 Max 2013 Avg. 2013
Long-term portfolio 6 5 40 7 8 8 56 28
Equities 9 8 101 12 14 5 98 18
Bonds 8 6 13 9 10 9 54 23
Money market portfolio 3 2 7 3 5 2 8 4
In 2014, risk measured by the risk model showed a decrease for the portfolios as a whole, as well as for the asset classes comprising fixed income instruments and equities. For the long-term port-folio, risk measured at year-end was 7.7%. This means that for the portfolio, yearly value fluctua-tions on the order of NOK 27bn can be expected.
The portfolio’s expected relative volatility at year-end 2014 was 6 basis points, compared with 8 basis points at year-end 2013.
At year-end, the money market portfolio had a measured risk of 3 basis points, which was a decrease from 5 basis points from 2013.
Strengths and weaknesses
The strength of these types of risk models is that one can estimate the risk in a portfolio across dif-ferent asset classes, markets, currencies, securi-ties and derivatives and express this risk as a single numerical value, which takes into account
The model-based risk estimates are based on historical relationships and will provide reliable forecast in markets without significant changes in volatility. Estimates will be less reliable in periods marked by significant changes in volatility and correlation. Calculated volatility gives a point esti-mate of risk and provides little information about the total risk profile and any tail risk. Annualisation means that it is assumed that volatility and port-folio composition are consistent over time. To compensate for these shortcomings, comple-mentary models and methods are employed, such as stress tests, and analyses of concentra-tion risk and realised return.
Verification of models
Regular testing of the models is performed to vali-date the model’s ability to estimate risk.
CREDIT RISK
Fixed income instruments in the portfolio’s benchmark are all rated investment grade by one of the major credit rating agencies. Investments in bonds are made on the basis of internal assess-ments of expected return and risk profile.
Table 7.5 is a breakdown of the bond portfolio by credit rating.
Table 7.5 Bond portfolio specified by credit rating
Amounts in NOK millions 31 Dec. 2014
AAA AA A BBB Lower rating Total
Government bonds 156 642 61 208 19 136 - - 236 986
Corporate bonds - - - - 35 35
Treasury bills 1 884 - - - - 1 884
Total bonds and other fixed
income instruments 158 526 61 208 19 136 - 35 238 905
Amounts in NOK millions 31 Dec. 2013
AAA AA A BBB Lower rating Total
Government bonds 122 160 61 095 - - - 183 255
Corporate bonds - - - - 43 43
Treasury bills 2 122 - - - - 2 122
Total bonds and other fixed
income instruments 124 282 61 095 - - 43 185 420
The bond portfolio’s credit quality was somewhat reduced during 2014. Table 7.6 shows that the share of the actual portfolio of AAA bonds decreased to 66.5% at year-end 2014 from 67.0%
at year-end 2013. The share of AA bonds was reduced to 25.5% at year-end 2014 from 32.9% at
year-end 2013. The reason was a downgrade of bonds issued by government bodies in Japan to A from AA. At year-end 2014, there were no hold-ings in the BBB category or the category “Lower rating” than BBB.
Table 7.6 is a breakdown of the bond portfolio by credit rating and currency.
Table 7.6 Bond portfolio by credit rating and currency, in percent
31. Dec. 2014
AAA AA A BBB Lower rating Total
US dollar 48.8 - - - - 48.8
Euro 17.6 16.6 - - - 34.3
British pound - 8.9 - - - 8.9
Japanese yen - - 8.0 - - 8.0
Swiss franc - - - -
Total 66.5 25.5 8.0 - - 100.0
31. Dec. 2013
AAA AA A BBB Lower rating Total
US dollar 48.7 - - - - 48.7
Euro 18.3 15.8 - - - 34.2
British pound - 8.7 - - - 8.7
Japanese yen - 8.4 - - - 8.4
Swiss franc - - - -
Total 67.0 32.9 - - - 100.0
Credit risk in the portfolio may be managed by the use of credit derivatives. At year-end 2014, there were no credit derivatives in the portfolio.
In addition to the credit ratings from credit rating agencies, measurement of credit risk is complimented with credit risk models, one of which is based on credit ratings and the other is based on observable credit premiums. Both these methods also take into account correlation and expected value of bonds in a bankruptcy situation.
The models are used for risk measurement and monitoring of credit risk in the fixed income port-folio.
COUNTERPARTY RISK
Counterparties are required to ensure efficient liquidity management and efficient trading and
deposits in banks are also defined as counterparty risk. Such counterparty risk also arises in connec-tion with day-to-day liquidity management.
Furthermore, there is exposure to counterparty risk related to counterparties in international set-tlement and custody systems where transactions settle. This can occur both in currency trades and with purchase and sale of securities. Settlement risk and exposure from trades with long maturities are also defined as counterparty risk.
Various counterparties are used to reduce con-centration risk and there are strict requirements for counterparty credit rating. Credit rating require-ments are generally higher for counterparties to unsecured deposits in banks than in situations where collateral is received. Changes in counter-party’s credit ratings are monitored continuously.
a positive market value. For instruments where collateral is used, minimum requirements have been set, relating to the credit quality, time to maturity and concentration of the collateral.
Netting and collateral agreements are entered into for all counterparties approved for these types of trades.
Counterparty risk is also reduced by setting exposure limits for individual counterparties.
Exposure per counterparty is measured daily against set limits. The methods used to calculate counterparty risk are in accordance with interna-tionally recognised standards. For OTC derivatives and currency contracts, the market value method is used. For each contract, the market value and a rate of future anticipated exposure is calculated.
Netting agreements and collateral are taken into account in the calculation of net exposure. Only cash is received as collateral for these contracts.
Exposure to counterparty risk is related to counterparties in the settlement and custody
systems, both in currency trades and in purchase and sale of securities. Settlement risk for most currency trades is low. The settlement risk is reduced through the use of currency settlement system CLS (Continues Linked Settlement) or by trading directly with settlement banks. In a few currencies, Norges Bank is exposed to settlement risk when the sold currency is delivered to the counterparty before the receipt of currency is confirmed. This type of exposure is included on the line OTC derivatives including currency con-tracts in Table 7.7
Towards the end of year, Norges Bank Invest-ment ManageInvest-ment changed its settleInvest-ment bank and agent for securities lending. With this shift, counterparty risk has been reduced somewhat, in that the settlement bank takes more responsibil-ity in connection with securities lending and.
In Table 7.7, exposure is broken down by type of activity/instrument associated with counterparty risk.
Table 7.7 Counterparty risk by type of position
Amounts in NOK millions 31 Dec. 2014 Gross
exposure Effect of
netting Collateral and
guarantees Net
exposure
Time depostits and unsecured bank deposits 322 - - 322
OTC derivatives including foreign exchange contracts - - -
-Repurchase and reverse repurchase agreements - - -
-Security lending transactions 594 - 552 42
Cash and bonds posted as collateral for derivative
trades 291 - - 291
Total 1 207 - 552 655
Amounts in NOK millions 31 Dec. 2013 Gross
exposure Effect of
netting Collateral and
guarantees Net
exposure
Time depostits and unsecured bank deposits 39 - - 39
OTC derivatives including foreign exchange contracts 2 2 -
-Repurchase and reverse repurchase agreements - - -
-Security lending transactions 687 - 330 357
Cash and bonds posted as collateral for derivative
trades 220 - - 220
Total 948 2 330 616
Counterparty risk measured by both gross and net exposure increased during 2014. Exposure increased primarily on account of increased cash holdings at year-end. At the same time, guarantee responsibilities for securities lending agents were extended during the year. The effect was a reduc-tion in net exposure, such that it increased less than gross exposure. This is because agents’
guarantee responsibilities are included only in the calculation of net exposure.
Norges Bank’s counterparties have a credit rating from independent credit rating agencies.
An internal credit evaluation can only be used as the basis for counterparty approval in instances when the counterparty risk is considered very low.
Credit ratings of the Bank’s counterparties are monitored and complemented by alternative credit risk indicators. Table 7.8 shows Norges Bank’s counterparties (number) classified accord-ing to credit rataccord-ing category.
Table 7.8 Counterparties* by credit rating
Norges Bank’s counterparties (excluding brokers) Brokers
31 Dec. 2014 31 Dec. 2013 31 Dec. 2014 31 Dec. 2013
AAA - - - -
AA 22 21 23 23
A 56 55 72 65
BBB 3 3 28 30
BB - 1 3 5
B - - 13 9
Total 81 80 139 132
* As counterparties are counted per legal entity, several counterparties may be included per corporate group.
OTHER RISK Liquidity risk
Liquidity risk is the risk of being unable to meet financial obligations at the agreed time. As a central bank, Norges Bank is not exposed to this type of liquidity risk in local currency.
Credit risk associated with lending to banks Norges Bank extends loans with fixed maturities (F-loans) and overnight loans (D-loans) to banks.
D-loans may be intraday and overnight. Loans to banks are extended against collateral in the form of securities pledged to Norges Bank, or F-depos-its with Norges Bank or collateral in the form of intraday deposits with Sveriges Riksbank or Dan-marks Nationalbank.
Norges Bank stipulates more detailed terms for pledging securities and fund units as collateral for
banks and facilitate appropriate levels of bank bor-rowing. Risk is limited, since only high quality securities are eligible and since the amount of the borrowing facility is lower than the market value of the collateral (haircut).
At 31 December 2014, there was no such lending to banks of significance.
Credit risk associated with loans to the International Monetary Fund (IMF)
Norges Bank’s loans to the IMF have been made to bolster the IMF General Arrangements to Borrow (GAB), which follow IMF guidelines.
Norges Bank is not directly exposed to risk in the loan portfolio managed by the IMF. The IMF has never realised a loss on its loans under the GAB.
The IMF has preferred creditor status, which means that the IMF has priority over all other